Forum Index
this forum welcomes all forumers who appreciate decent and well thought out views and discussions. all forumers are encouraged to accept that different forumers have different views and often there is no absolutely right or wrong views.
Menu
 Forum IndexHome
FAQFAQ
MemberlistMemberlist
UsergroupsUsergroups
RegisterRegister
ProfileProfile
Log in to check your private messagesMessages
Log inLogin/Out

Quick Search

Advanced Search

Links
mysingaporenews
Singapore River Tour
Singapore Education
Singapore Orchids
littlespeck
ypapforum
Singapore Hosting
Sample Link 2
Sample Link 2

Who's Online
[ Administrator ]
[ Moderator ]


Google Search
Google

http://www.phpbb.com
a no brainer article by robert kagan

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> World Affairs
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14075
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2006 8:42 am    Post subject: a no brainer article by robert kagan Reply with quote

robert kagan is a senior associate at the fame carnegie endowment for international peace. wow, big title in a big big organisation.. how could he write a no brainer article? his article is in the today paper.. it must be a great article with deep insight to be worthy of being selected and reposted in our paper.

oh, he also asked a no brainer question, 'so what if usa has double standards?'

his article was about how sensible and logical usa was in its nuclear deal with india, providing india with civilian nuclear technology but not to iran.. and his reasoning is that the nuclear nonproliferation treaty is as good as dead or ineffective.. so no big deal.. he forgot to apply this no big deal position on the pressure the americans are putting on iran and north korea.

and from his comment that 'it(india) possesses a navy capable of helping patrol vital waterways and a military capable of acting as a deterrent against powerful neighbours. yet, it has no record of using it for aggressive purposes but has been a remarkably peaceful and constructive member of the global community' reveals how young he is. probably born yesterday.

would he like to ask india's neighbours how peaceful india has been over the last 50 years or so? wonder if he know where india is.

and the best part is that he quoted, 'as bismarck would have said, the answer is a no brainer.'

wow, great political analyst from a great thinktank institution.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14075
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2006 10:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

reading any english newspaper, locally or overseas, one cannot run away from the fact that all the reportings, or the majority of the reportings on international issues involving the superpowers, were written by europeans and americans.. not that there were no asian writers or asian views.. but either these views were not considered worthy, or they were consciously not reported to avoid giving them an airing..

another reason is that the english media, including many asian local english media, are more comfortable with views articulated in english by westerners.. mentally most of them are western biased as many have been bred in a western intellectual environment.

then there is also the reason of paying to be published, for certain official views to be heard.. and you need a rich agency to do that.

so what happens in the english media world today is the same song being sang by the same group of writers, journalists, reporters and editors.. some editors just borrow or buy articles that are readily available and for convenience. but they would not borrow or buy articles from other asian news agencies.. the favourites are of course nyt, washington post, reuters, afp, and all the broadcasters.

and the world is led to believe that the usa is the ultimate model and the paragon of goodness. it can never do wrong and nothing it does is wrong.. or simply no western writers or news generator would want to talk negative things about it.. it is a one way process, a whole propaganda machinery in support of the american empire.

there were a few voices in the wilderness that were heard once a while.. but not often enough, and not many to present a fairer and more balance treatment of the evils of empires.. how could it be fair and balance when many of the writers were paid just to do what they are doing. Wink
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14075
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another piece of crap which our local paper, this time Today, think it is worth publishing from New York Times.

The article by David Brooks, dunno who he is, was all praised for Rice Condoleeza as if she had made the biggest discovery of the century. It titles, 'The US is Back in Business. At one fell swoop, Iran is left floundering.'

Now what have Rice done to deserve such a flattering glorification. Actually she only said that she was prepared to talk to Tehran. And this after all the threats of nuking Iran or applying sanction. So it is a grand plan, a big success. Why?

Oh, according to Brooks, Tehran was gaining and trampling around the world in total disregard of the US threat. Now the US said it wants to talk to Tehran, so Tehran is now fumbling and on the defensive.

What rubbish! And as expected, Tehran flatlyannounced that it refused to talk to the US. Now what of the grand plan?

In reality, Tehran has been gaining support foom many corners of the world for its right to build a nuclear plant for non military purposes. The oil producing countries have endorsed it. And a few days back the Non Aligned Movement has also supported this stand. Both threw the US threat and objection to Tehran's nuclear ambition into the rubbish bin. The US has been ignored by countries of these two movements.

The US is now on the defensive, unable to find support to nuke Iran. Now it has to fall back to talks and to the UN, an organisation it has held in contempt and total disrespect since the Iraq invasion.

The US is now all alone against Iran. Now what's so great about Rice offering to talk when the Iranians are ignoring her and the US?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14075
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 8:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Compare to the craps I mentioned in the above postings, William Pfaff wrote a nice piece of well balance article today in the Today paper. In his article he explained rationally the position of the Americans and the reasons behind their actions with respect to Iran's nuclear ambition.

Instead of glorifying the American stand of a willingness to speak to Iran, he said that there could be two reasons for it. One, a genuine attempt to dissuade the Iranians from going ahead and eventually building a bomb. And secondly, if Iran remains adamant, the Americans could then persuade its allies, especially the EU, to take actions against Iran.

But what at best this is, according to the French press is a 'spectacular softening of the American position.' It does not shift from the American's first position, to end Iran's nuclear ambition.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14075
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2006 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Telling the truth like they never did before.

Lately I can sense a shift in the way truth is being generated in the media. Our local press are now churning a different kind of truth from the west after a series of rubbish from the Robert Kagan type.

Today there is a shift, a paradigm shift of a sort, from Tom Plate, who once used to churn up Kagan type of craps. He wrote a piece in the Straits Times looking at the American hang up over an emerging China. He was equally appalled and astonished that the Americans did not know why the Chinese have a need to beef up their military capabilities while the Americans kept on 'warning regularly, through periodic reports and episodic statements, about its(China) relentless ferocity.'

And he pointedly say it in no simpler terms why the Chinese need to build up. "What precise theory of exceptionalism would allow the US to forge ahead militarily, spending far more of its national treasure on arms both proportionately and aggregately than other countries, but would also forbid other nations from doing the same?....Is it that it is okay for the US to possess a vast stockpile of weapons but it is not okay that others have them, precisely because the US would never use them but the others might?...Guess which superpower has consistently refused to offer the world a 'no first use' policy?( ie first to use nuclear weapons)"

His final statement, a simple advice to the American leaders, is "If we want others to build down their forces, then we have to downsize ours too so that we can then righteously insist that others follow our lead."

He should have asked the Americans to revisit the SALTs they had with the Soviet Union in the 60s and 70s, and the underlying principle behind the SALT talks.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> World Affairs All times are GMT + 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group. Hosted by Vodien Internet Solutions